Equity theory sees relationship maintenance occurring through balance and stability
Equity in relationship theory does not mean equality; instead it believes individuals are motivated to achieve fairness in relationships and to feel dissatisfied with inequity (unfairness). Definitions of equity within a relationship can differ between individuals.
Maintenance of relationships occurs through balance and stability. Relationships where individuals put in more than they receive, or receive more than they put in, are inequitable, leading to dissatisfaction and possible dissolution (ending of the relationship). The recognition of inequity within a relationship presents a chance for a relationship to be saved- that is, maintained further by making adjustments so that there is a return to equity.
Relationships may alternate between periods of perceived balance and imbalance, with individuals being motivated to return to a state of equity. The greater the perceived imbalance, the greater the efforts to realign the relationship, so long as a chance of doing so is perceived to be viable.
Walster et al (1978) saw equity as based on four principles, as set out in Table 3.2.
| Principle | Description |
| Profit | Rewards are maximized, and costs maintained |
| Distribution | Trade offs and compensations are negotiated to achieve fairness in a relationship |
| Dissatisfaction | The greater the degree of perceived unfairness, the greater the sense of dissatisfaction |
| Realignment | If restoring equity is possible, maintenance will continue, with attempts made to realign equity |
Research
Argyle (1977) found that people in close relationships do not think in terms of rewards and costs unless they feel dissatisfied, implying that equity, at least in a conscious fashion, is not a valid explanation of relationship maintenance.
Murstein & MacDonald (1983) supported Argyle, finding that a conscious concern with ‘getting a fair deal’, especially in the short term, makes compatibility hard to achieve, especially between married couples.
Yum et al (2009) looked at different types of heterosexual romantic relationships in six different cultures. As predicated by equity theory, maintenance strategies differed, with individuals in perceived equitable relationships engaging in most maintenance strategies, followed by those in perceived over-benefited and under-benefited relationships. Cultural factors had little effect, suggesting that equity theory can be applied to relationships across cultures.
Evaluation
Some research suggests that equity theory does not apply to all cultures. Moghaddam et al (1983) found that US students prefer equity (fairness), but European students prefer equality, suggesting that the theory reflects the values of US society.
Mills & Clark (1982) believe that it is not possible to assess equity in loving relationships, as much input is emotional and therefore unquantifiable and to do so diminishes the quality of love.
Equity seems more important to females, suggesting that the theory is not applicable to both genders. Hochschild & Machung (1989) found that women do most of the work to make relationships equitable.
Equity theory still portrays people as selfish. Many researchers, like Duck (1988) prefer to see people as concerned with an equitable distribution of rewards and costs for themselves and their partners.